Local plan scoping consultation

Dear planning team,

We are writing in response to the Local Plan Scoping Consultation. We live near one of the sites submitted through the Call for Sites process; CFS26 358, Land North of Blakelow Road, Macclesfield (6.5 Ha, proposed for housing). The fact that this site could be considered for housing development concerns us, and we wish to comment on the criteria and priorities that we believe should guide the new Local Plan's approach to allocation of sites for development.

1. Green Belt policy must be applied with integrity
The land north of Blakelow Road is designated Green Belt. The plan's own stated approach must be followed: assess needs → maximise brownfield use → consider non-Green Belt sites → assess grey belt → and only then, in truly exceptional circumstances, consider full Green Belt release (§5.17). Every hectare released is a permanent and irreversible loss. The new plan must treat Green Belt release as a measure of absolute last resort, not as a convenient option for accommodating a centrally imposed housing target, and must demonstrate publicly and transparently that Macclesfield's brownfield capacity has been fully utilised before any green hillside on the town's Green Belt fringe is even considered.

2. Brownfield-first must be a genuine priority
The scoping document rightly acknowledges that national policy "includes a renewed commitment to prioritising the use of previously developed (brownfield) land where it is possible to do so" (§3.15). It also states that the plan will "maximise the use of brownfield and underused land" before considering Green Belt release (§5.17). Macclesfield contains former industrial and brownfield sites within its urban area, many of which have been put forward. These should be fully exhausted before greenfield or Green Belt sites on the town's fringes are considered. The plan should include a rigorous, transparent brownfield-first assessment methodology, and should publish a clear audit of brownfield capacity before any greenfield site allocations are proposed.
The site north of Blakelow Road is a green, undeveloped hillside on the fringes of town and should not be prioritised when brownfield alternatives within the town remain available.

3. The Pennine foothills landscape deserves explicit protection
The scoping document's own spatial portrait describes the borough's landscape as "predominantly the extensive flat lowland plain and gently rolling farmland, bordered to the west by the distinctive sandstone ridge and to the east by the rising Pennine foothills" (§4.3). Landscape character is rightly listed as a factor in determining the spatial distribution of development (§5.25). We would urge the council to ensure that the Pennine foothills are recognised in the new plan as a valued landscape meriting a high level of protection, and that green hillsides visible from the town and wider areas which contribute to this landscape setting are weighted accordingly in the site assessment methodology.
The site north of Blakelow Road is not generic countryside; it is a distinctive, regionally significant landscape that forms the setting of both Macclesfield and the Peak District National Park.

4. Site assessment should give meaningful weight to environmental and landscape value
The scoping document sets out welcome commitments to protecting and enhancing the natural environment, biodiversity, and valued landscapes (§5.96–5.103). In applying these principles to site assessment, we would ask that the methodology:
• Recognises that sites do not need formal landscape or ecological designations to have significant local value. A green hillside forming part of the Pennine foothills, visible across the town, supporting wildlife, and contributing to the setting of the town, has genuine value even without a statutory designation.
• Considers cumulative impact. The loss of one green hillside may seem incremental, but taken together with other fringe sites, the erosion of Macclesfield's landscape setting would be substantial and irreversible.
• Considers the council's climate commitments. Building on greenfield slopes results in higher embodied and operational carbon than redeveloping brownfield sites in accessible urban locations, and conflicts with the council’s ambition to become carbon neutral by 2045 (§5.113).

5. The settlement hierarchy should focus growth within existing urban areas
Macclesfield is a Principal Town with established infrastructure, services, and transport links, including direct rail to Manchester and London. The plan should concentrate growth within its urban area, on brownfield sites and through appropriate densification, rather than expanding outwards onto green hillsides. Edge-of-settlement expansion should only be considered where it can be demonstrated that sufficient brownfield capacity does not exist and that the specific site represents the most sustainable option when assessed against landscape, environmental, and accessibility criteria.

Thank you for considering these comments. We look forward to engaging with the subsequent consultation stages as the plan progresses.

Best wishes,


Sam Ward & Solene Fercocq